Skip to main content

Full text of "Rapid Population Growth Consequences And Policy Implications"

See other formats

Entering these numbers in the above formula we find that the percentage under 15 on these assumptions is 47.4. We have used data for women only, and the proportion of boys under 15 would be somewhat higher, but we will not go into this. Suffice it to say that on the assumptions constituting a stable model we have accounted for 47.4 percent out of the 51.5 percent actually shown in 1966.
The discrepancy could be due to changes in the birth and death rates, so that the 1966 figure does not represent the condition to which the people then alive had actually been subject, or to erroneous statement in the current ages of the population.
Sweden and Honduras. Let us now turn to Sweden in 1800. Here the percentage of the population under age 15 was 32.6, and the stable calculation made just as before says 29.7 percent. The difference between Sweden and Honduras was thus about 18 percent, and about 13 percent was explained by the stable model. We continue to bear in mind that part of what was not explained could be error and so does not require explanation in these terms.
The contrast between Honduras in 1966 and contemporary Europe is even greater than the comparison with Sweden of 1800. The 51 percent under age 15 of Honduras stands against about 24 percent for our consolidation of Europe in 1965. On the other hand, the United States shows 31 percent under age 15 for 1965, decidedly above Europe. This difference is explained by the fact that the postwar baby boom in the United States was larger than that in Europe.
The discussion to this point has shown substantial differences in the observed proportion of children under age 15 among populations and has shown that the observed proportions are reflected in the stable age distributions calculated from birth and death rates. This relation will enable us to explain observed age differences by stable ones, a happy circumstance, since stable results can be broken down and reassembled in various ways.
Two Methods of Study
To what extent is the difference in the proportion under age 15 between any two countries due to different birth rates and to what extent to different death rates? There are two ways of answering this question:
Holding One Set of Rates Fixed While Allowing the Other to Change. An obvious method is to redo the calculation first using a common set of birth rates and then a common set of death rates. We compare, for example, the effect of birth rates between Honduras 1966 and Sweden 1800 by working out the proportion on the stable model with the same death rates-say with the same Honduras 1966 life tableóbut using the birth rates appropriate totand them. In other cases thehey were more numerous, and this means more and better jobs. A further possible advantage of their smaller numbers is a larger ratio of managers to workers if management is provided by those older than